Length of School Cycle and the “Quality” of Education

[A2010001]

ABRAHAM I. FELIPE and CAROLINA C. PORIO

ABSTRACT: The relation between length of formal schooling and

“quality” of education was studied using TIMSS-published data and
UNESCO information about the educational cycles of TIMSS-
participating countries. The study was done to provide information
relevant to a recommendation to lengthen the cycle of Philippine
education. Three types of evidence were presented – graphic data in the
form of charts, chart data converted into a form that may be analysed
using simple quantitative methods, and regression. Evidences consistent
with the recommendation from the charts and their quantitative analyses
were few, ambiguous and very weak. In contrast, evidence from the
regression studies showed that lengthening the pre-school sub-cycle (but
not the elementary or high school sub-cycles or the combined basic
education cycle) led to better test performance. All the same, the
researchers did not interpret this finding to mean an endorsement of a
simple mechanical adding of calendar time for pre-schooling, as some
proponents of a 12-year cycle advocate. Instead, they interpreted the
variable “length of pre-schooling” as a surrogate for several factors and
measures that usually accompany a serious effort to improve the
educational system. As a whole, no convincing evidence was found to
justify the recommendation to lengthen the cycle.

Keywords: TIMSS, Philippine education cycle, UNESCO levels of

education, Philippine educational reforms, New Philippine Education
Highway
INTRODUCTION

The present report is an in-country study of the relation between length of

formal schooling (school cycle) and what Philippine media has called
“quality” of education.  It was prepared to be relevant to a discussion of the
desirable length of the Philippine school cycle, views on which were sought
by some quarters from candidates for the May 2010 presidential elections
in order to assess their qualifications and readiness to lead the country as
president.  Important educational personalities had formed strong views
on the topic even when the basis for such views had been scanty. Anecdotal
reports of entrepreneurs promoting or using Filipino manpower have been
an only regular source of “proof” of the deteriorated “quality” of the
country’s educated labor force. The purpose of this report is to present
facts and data for a more intelligent discussion of the issue.

The results of recent comparative testing in

science and mathematics of students from
various countries (TIMSS) have contributed
to an over-reaction to the “quality” of
Philippine education. Briefly, TIMSS has
contributed to the conclusion that its
“quality” was poor.

The results of recent comparative testing in science and mathematics of

students from various countries (TIMSS) have contributed to an over-
reaction to the "quality" of Philippine education. Briefly, TIMSS has
contributed to the conclusion that the "quality" of Philippine education was
poor. This conclusion is, of course, misleading...

Be that as it may, this paper will proceed to examine what TIMSS has about
educational cycles, particularly the 12-year cycle which is presently of
matter to Filipino policy makers.

In all three (out of four) international comparisons wherein the Philippines

participated, the Filipino test scores were close to the bottom. For example,
in the fourth study (studied in detail for this report), Filipino children in
Grade 8[3] were third from the bottom of 41 participating countries; the
Philippine 4th graders were also third from the bottom of 25 participating
countries. The results on Filipino school children when scores were
analysed test-wise (seven tests for the 4 th grade – and nine tests for the 8 th
grade) were similarly low. The seven tests for the 4 th grade were Patterns
and Relationships, Measurement, Geometry, Data, Life Sciences, Physical
Science and Earth Science. The nine tests for the 8 th grade (the equivalent
of the second year high school in the Philippine system) were Algebra,
Measurement, Geometry, Data, Life Sciences, Chemistry, Physics, Earth
Science and Environmental Sciences.

Those who have looked into this matter, including a recent task force
created by former President Arroyo, have also noted that the Philippine
educational cycle is very short. Of the 41 TIMSS countries with available
information on their educational cycles, the Philippines had the shortest
cycle (a total of 11 years, including one year of pre-schooling, whereas 11 of
those 41 countries have as long as 16-year cycles).

This, said one proponent of a 12-year basic education curriculum, is simply

not enough: it is like cramming 12 years of lessons in 10 years of studying.
That, he concluded, is the reason for the Filipinos’ non-competitive
mastery of science and mathematics (and other school subjects).

Up to this time, the relation between the performance on TIMSS and the
length of the educational cycle has not been studied properly. Claims about
performance and cycle length have only been impressionistic and often
erroneous. This study will assess these claims more methodically using
data from the TIMSS.

METHOD

A file for each TIMSS-participating country was constructed, consisting of

the country’s mean TIMSS test scores and the corresponding UNESCO
data on educational cycles. The test data were taken from the summary
statistics report of the TIMSS International Study Center, Boston College,
the center of TIMMS studies[4]. The UNESCO data were taken from its
website[5].

A Total Test Score for 4th grade and another for 8th grade (the equivalent of
the second year of high school) were added, yielding eight 4 th grade scores
and ten 8th grade scores to analyze.

Findings are reported below in three forms. The first form, consisting of
graphic data (charts), is suitable to visual inspection and appreciation.

The rationale of the proposal to lengthen the

educational cycle in the Philippines is really
driven by a purpose more complex than a
plain need to improve quality of Philippine
education... there were indications of a
Philippine interest to comply, regardless of
the cost and the uncertainty of the outcome. 
This could be the reason why the views on the
matter were sought from the candidates for
the 2010 presidential elections.
The second form started with the charts reduced into forms that can be
analysed quantitatively. For simplicity the charts were reduced into 2×2
contingency tables. There are established rules for making inferences from
such tables that can be used to assess if sub-cycle length is related to test
scores. These established rules were the rules used in this study.

The third form, regression, is more complicated. It consists of a system for

assessing which of several possible “causes” (variables) is (are) responsible
for the observations “of interest”. In the TIMSS case, the observations of
interest were the TIMSS test scores. The explanatory variables were the
lengths of the pre-school, elementary, and high school sub-cycles. This
way, the analyses also become relevant to various proposals to lengthen
pre-school, elementary, and/or high school phase(s) of basic education.

FINDINGS

The charts: graphic evidence

The use of charts as evidence of any relation between the length of a sub-
cycle and test scores is illustrated in Figures 1 and 2.

Figure 1 shows the relation between length of the pre-school sub-cycle

(horizontal axis) and standardized Total Test Scores (vertical axis) for 8 th
graders. Each endpoint in the figures is a country’s mean standardized
score in the test. graders. Figure 2 is the comparable chart for 4.

In each figure, a country’s mean score is referred to the centroid which is

the mean of all test scores at the mean length of the sub-cycle of all TIMSS’
country participants.

In Figure 1, the lower left-hand corner is the region for low performing
countries with short pre-school education sub-cycles[6]. Note that the
Philippines is somewhere in the lower left hand corner but is appreciably
higher than South Africa which is the lowest. Note also that a short pre-
schooling does not condemn a country’s 8th graders to dullness. South
Korea has the same length of pre-schooling as the Philippines but is one of
the top performers in TIMSS. At the same time, other countries had longer
pre-schooling (e.g., Ghana, Morocco, 2 years; Botswana, Bahrain, Saudi
Arabia, 3 years) but lower TIMSS scores.

In the comparable chart for 4th graders (Figure 2), one can note similar
observations. South Korea (the topnotcher for 8 th graders) did not
participate; hence, its 4th graders had no TIMSS records. Australia had a
respectable TIMSS score even if it has only one year of pre-schooling. On
the other, Morocco (2 years of pre-school), Norway (3 years) and Armenia
and Slovenia (both 4 years) had lower scores than Australia.

Long sub-cycles have been believed to contribute to higher achievement. 

This notion is clearly wrong in the cases of elementary cycle data. In
Figures 3 and 4, the test scores of the Philippines which has a 6-year
elementary cycle was lower than the test scores of all 13 countries with
shorter elementary cycles (Russia, Armenia, Latvia, Slovak Republic,
Slovenia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Serbia, Romania, Moldova, Italy, Egypt and
Iran). The only exception was the case of 8th grade tests for Palestine.

Differences between any two countries could be tested for statistical

significance by anyone because Boston College, the center of TIMSS
studies, published the standard deviations and standard errors of each
country’s scores. Significance tests were no longer done for this report,
however, because the added work entailed is not compelling for the paper’s
arguments.

All in all, 72 charts in the form of Figures 1 and 2 were made, one chart for
each of the seven (7) 4th grade tests and one more for their combined total 
score, and one chart for each of the nine (9) 8th grade tests plus one more
for their total score, per sub-cycle (pre-school, elementary, high school and
the total pre-college cycle)[7]. However, only six (6) more charts will be
presented just so that this report may include all charts on Total Scores   ---
Figure 3 through Figure 8 – in order to get a feel of what the other 64
charts contain. Excluded from this report are the charts for individual
tests.

As for the Philippines, a scrutiny of the...

charts would show her repeatedly ending up
at or near the bottom. This observation seems
to have been the sole basis for the proposal to
lengthen the Philippine education cycle...
Considering the findings from other
countries, however, attributing the results to
the length of the Philippine cycle is neither
objective nor correct. The evidence is clear
and irrefutable: some countries have short
sub-cycles but have high scores; other
countries have long sub-cycles but have low
scores.
The distribution of test results does not follow
a clear rule. Some countries with short cycles
had high TIMSS results; others with long
cycles also had low TIMSS results.

The report that the test scores of students from Singapore, South Korea,
Japan and Hong Kong were way above those of comparable American
students (see Figures 7 and 8 above) has elicited embarrassed reactions
among many American politicians, professional and citizen groups and
media. What has rankled them was the middling performance of American
students and the findings on Singapore and South Korea whose
educational cycles are only 13 years long as against the Americans’ 15 years.
The superior performance of Japan and Hong Kong can at least be partly
explained away – the education cycle of Japan is as long as that of the
United States (15 years) and Hong Kong’s is longer (16 years).

As for the Philippines, a scrutiny of the 72 charts would show her

repeatedly ending up at or near the bottom. This observation seems to have
been the sole basis for the proposal to lengthen the Philippine education
cycle which absorbed a major blame for the results. Considering the
findings from other countries, however, attributing the results to the length
of the Philippine cycle is neither objective nor correct. The evidence is clear
and irrefutable:  some countries have short sub-cycles but have high
scores; other countries have long sub-cycles but have low scores.

2×2 contingency tables

To get more information, each chart was virtually quartered by, first,
dropping a perpendicular through the centroid onto the x-axis and then,
second, drawing a line through the centroid parallel to the x-axis. By this
means, each chart was effectively divided into four more or less equal
quadrants[8], with the crosshairs of the intersecting lines set at the
centroid.  This reduces each chart into a 2×2 contingency table for which
there are established rules for making inferences when assessing if sub-
cycle length is related to test scores.

Table 1 below illustrates the model 2×2 contingency table that results from
quartering a chart.

In general, one would say that an association between length of sub-cycle

and test scores exists if the cases are preponderantly in the diagonals. The
established rules pertain to what constitute “preponderance” when one
wants to rule out randomness 95 or 99 times out of a hundred, or 995 or
999 times out of a thousand, or some other numerical criteria. A statistic is
computed and evaluated for statistical significance.

It was deemed reasonable to first analyse any effects of the cycle by its
identifiable separate segments. Procedurally, this entails isolating a
segment (e.g., the pre-school segment, the elementary segment, or the high
school segment as the UNESCO does) and then evaluating its effect on test
performance. One consequence of this procedure was to make  the analysis
relevant to various proposals to lengthen a sub-cycle – such as the
proposals to  lengthen  pre-schooling, add a year to elementary education,
add a “bridging” year before high school, or add another year in high
school, as the case may be.  To round up, all segments were re-combined
into one total “pre-university” (“pre-college”) cycle for analysis.

Finally, it was decided to put back the segments together again and study
which of them singly or in combination accounted for the observed effects.
There will be more on this method later. But first, the analyses by
segments.Table 2 contains the outcome of quartering the charts on pre-
schooling. The findings on 4th grade tests are grouped separately from
those on 8th grade tests. The cells (A, B, C and D) in Figure 9 are presented
as just one row in order to save space. The statistic for evaluating
significance is Chi Square. Column p represents a Chi Square’s significance
level; “ns” means non-significant.

Note that of the eight (8) 4 th grade tests, the long pre-school sub-cycles
were related to higher scores in only two cases (i.e., 2:8).  In contrast, long
pre-school sub-cycles were related to higher scores in eight cases (i.e.,
8:10) of the ten 8th grade tests.

The findings about the elementary school sub-cycle were different. In Table
3, none of the eight 4th grade tests (i.e., 0:8) or of the ten 8th grade tests
(i.e., 0:10) was significant. It made no difference whether the elementary
school sub-cycle was long or short; length of elementary school sub-cycle
was unrelated to test results.

The findings on the length of the high school sub-cycle (Table 4) were
different from those on elementary sub-cycle. They were more like those on
the length of pre-schooling.  Comparing the pre-school and high school
sub-cycles, two of eight 4th grade tests reached significance (i.e., 2:8) when
pre-school su-cycle length was used; none of the 4 th grade tests (i.e., 0:8)
did he same when the high school sub-cycle was used.  However, with 8th
grade tests, eight of ten tests (i.e., 8:10) reached significance.
Based on the results of the 2×2 contingency table analyses, the 8 th grade
(high school) test results were more predictable than the 4 th grade
(elementary) test results when using the length of sub-cycles as predictors,
except when using the elementary sub-cycle (in which case, performance
could not be predicted). Regression Strictly speaking, the 2×2 contingency
table is only a model for establishing association between two variables,
not a model for predicting one variable (the dependent variable) from one
or more other variables (independent variables). It is regression that
performs the prediction function. Strictly speaking, regression is the more
appropriate tool to test the consequence of the proposals to lengthen the
education at various segments – pre-schooling sub-cycle, elementary sub-
cycle, high school sub-cycle or even later. It could help evaluate which
individual sub-cycle, or which sub-cycles in combination is (are)
responsible for the test results.   However, while regression is, structurally,
appropriate to address the proposal to lengthen the education cycle, its
application could also be questioned.

First, the case when its use is proper. The use of regression to determine
whether the pre-school sub-cycle affects the results of elementary and high
school tests is a proper application. So with the case of determining
whether the length of elementary sub-cycle affects high school test results.
Both cases involve an earlier event and later effects.

Second, the case when its use could be questionable. The use of regression
to determine if the high school sub-cycle is related to grade 8 and grade 4
test results, or the case of the elementary sub-cycles affecting 4th grade test
results, are cases of questionable use. Both cases involve “causes” that
happened or were completed after their alleged effects.

If regression was still employed in this study even in cases of questionable

applications, it was only because those who propose lengthening the
education cycle invariably quote the TIMSS results as supporting evidence.
The use of regression can at least show if the mathematics of statistical
prediction supports their proposals.

The mode of prediction that was used consisted of evaluating

simultaneously the role of three predictors (lengths of pre-school sub-cycle,
of elementary sub-cycle and of high school sub-cycle) in predicting test
scores. In that way, the analyses become relevant to the different proposals
to lengthen the school cycle.  In the actual processing, however, it adopted
a rule that could lead to having no report about a specific sub-cycle. The
procedure was as follows: it first adopted a criterion for accepting that a
sub-cycle could have a significant effect (namely, an F statistic with a
p≤.05). After that, it considered the next best sub-cycle and accepted to
process it if it could meet the p≤.05 criterion. Otherwise, it would reject
that sub-cycle and stop processing. As a result, this mode of regression
(step-wise) might not have anything to say about a sub-cycle. In that event,
it only meant that the procedure judged that that sub-cycle had no
significant effects.

Table 7 is the summary of the regression analyses. The dependent variable

(the TIMSS test scores) are listed on the first column. The 4 th grade tests
are listed separately from the 8th grade tests. The second column identifies
the independent variable (sub-cycle) which turned out to be statistically
significant. Note that only the pre-school sub-cycle had been significant (in
15 of 18 regression analyses). There was no instance when the elementary
or the high school sub-cycle ever reached significance. The amount of
variation in test scores that was explained by the independent variable
(column 2) is R2.. The magnitudes of R2 reported in Table 6 are very
respectable. Note that as a whole, more variance in 4 th grade tests is
explained than in 8th grade tests, i.e., scores in the former tests could be
predicted better. This makes sense: the 4 th grade is closer in time to the
pre-school sub-cycle.

As a whole, there is no clear empirical basis in TIMSS to justify a proposal

for the Philippines to lengthen its education cycle.

Evidence from the charts

Just using the naked eye, a scrutiny of chart data does not intuitively
support the proposal to lengthen the cycle. The distribution of test results
does not follow a clear rule. Some countries with short cycles had high
TIMSS results; others with long cycles also had low TIMSS results. Earlier,
details about the test scores of Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong,
the United States and many other countries have been highlighted in order
to illustrate this point. To paraphrase an earlier statement, a short pre-
schooling does not consign a country’s school children to dullness. The
only predictable thing about the Philippine results is that they are at the
bottom of one test pile after another test pile. But the piles do not arrange
themselves by some coefficient of cycle length. There are more reasonable
explanations for the Philippine outcome. As an action plan to improve
Philippine education, lengthening the cycle has no justification from
TIMSS. That solution is difficult and expensive, with uncertain effect on
quality. There are other less expensive and more realistic solutions whose
outcomes are less uncertain.

Evidence from the 2×2 contingency tables

A more methodical analysis of the distribution of country scores using 2×2

contingency tables suggests that length of education cycle is related to test
scores in some but not even in most cases. Table 6 shows significant
positive relations between sub-cycle length and test scores in 24 out of 40
cases involving 8th grade tests, but only three (3) out of 32 cases  involving
4th grade tests). This success ratio may justify a proposal to lengthen the
cycle because it is more difficult to reject statistical null hypotheses than to
accept them. However, the results were ambiguous as to which sub-cycle is
more important to lengthen.
Evidence from the use of regression

The regression analyses yielded very important findings.   In the 18

instances of predicting test scores (8 elementary and 10 high school
scores), lengthening the elementary and high school sub-cycles did not
result to higher scores. However, lengthening the pre-school cycle
repeatedly led to higher scores (in 15 out of 18 instances (Table 7). Table 7
also shows that lengthening the pre-school sub-cycle affects 4 th grade
scores more than 8th grade scores. Liberally interpreted, this finding says
that it is lengthening the pre-school sub-cycle, rather than the other two,
that is more important.

Interpreting the Regression Findings

However, one should be careful with such a liberal interpretation. The data
could be misleading.Lengthening the pre-school is not a simple
endorsement of a new “Head-start” program[9].  This misinterpretation
should be avoided. It is generally accepted that the usual superiority of
head-starters at the beginning of formal schooling is only temporary and
easily overcome “in time”, especially in “content” areas such as reading,
numbers and science. This well-known fact in pre-school education is not
the same as the findings in the present study. In the present case, the
impact of lengthening the pre-school sub-cycle is in fact on content areas
like algebra, physics, chemistry, and other school subjects.It is obvious that
“pre-school” in the Head-start sense is not the same as “pre-school” in the
present study.

The only predictable thing about the

Philippine results is that they are at the
bottom of one test pile after another test pile.
But the piles do not arrange themselves by
some coefficient of cycle length. There are
more reasonable explanations for the
Philippine outcome. As an action plan to
improve Philippine education, lengthening
the cycle has no justification from TIMSS.

Some final words

Based on the present study, there is no basis to expect that lengthening the
educational cycle, calendar-wise, will improve the quality of education. The
strong message in this study, namely, that it is lengthening the pre-school
sub-cycle that will be the step to take in order to improve “quality”, needs
more comments. One cannot just continue lengthening pre-schooling from
kindergarten down to the period for oral and anal training because of sheer
limits of time. Further, nothing is known about the relation of experiences
during these early periods to competence in mathematics and the sciences,
which are the subject of TIMSS. The importance of the pre-school sub-
cycle is better interpreted to mean the presence of a strong economy and
the value and support for good teaching.

The issue of lengthening the education cycle, of course, is important

because it is a real issue for the Philippines in its international relations, it
is a salient issue at the higher echelons of Philippine government, it is
currently a policy issue for the country, and some proposals on how to
resolve it may cost the country much.

The value of the 12-year cycle is ultimately a matter of weighing the large
and certain costs against the uncertain gains in lengthening the education
cycle. However, one can adopt a guideline in weighing these costs and
gains. One such guideline may be that individuals who are inconvenienced
by non-standardised cycles should be the ones to bear the costs of reducing
those inconveniences. People in the farms and small barangays should be
spared the burden of a system that will not benefit them. The government
could help those interested in foreign studies and work placement by
supporting an appropriate system of assessment, rather than tinker with
the whole cycle length. This solution addresses the alleged problem in a
more focused way and does not indiscriminately impose on every Filipino
the costs of meeting the needs of a few.

Many educators seem to expect too much of the 12-year educational cycle.
More likely, lengthening the cycle is so concrete a step that it gives them
the feeling they are doing something about a faulty system. A friend who
learned of the plan to adopt this proposal was reminded of the following
Howie Mandel joke:  “My wife does not know how to cook.  So she went out
and bought herself a microwave oven.  Now, she does not know how to
cook–faster!”  If the plan is hastily adopted, pretty soon the problem would
be how to cut short a poor quality 12-year cycle.

The value of the 12-year cycle is ultimately a

matter of weighing the large and certain
costs against the uncertain gains in
lengthening the education cycle... People in
the farms and small barangays should be
spared the burden of a system that will not
benefit them. The government could help
those interested in foreign studies and work
placement by supporting an appropriate
system of assessment, rather than tinker with
the whole cycle length. This solution
addresses the alleged problem in a more
focused way and does not indiscriminately
impose on every Filipino the costs of meeting
the needs of a few.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the following staff of

FAPE: Roderick Malonzo, Edith Ocado, and Allan Sarion, for collecting,
organizing, encoding and helping process data and Lani Ty for editing the
statistical outputs.

REFERENCES

1. EDPITAF (1976), Survey of the outcomes of elementary education,

(SOUTELE), Department of Education, Manila
2.Felipe AI (2006), Unexpected learning competencies of Grades 5 and 6
pupils in public elementary schools: a Philippine report,
International Education Journal, 7(7), 957-967
3.TIMSS International Study Center, Appendix and summary statistics and
standard errors for proficiency in mathematics and science, In:
Lynch School of Education (2008),  Highlights from TIMSS 2007:
mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-
grade students in an international context, Boston College, Boston.
pp.486-503
4.www.uis,unesco.org/template/pdf/gea/GED_EN.pdf
ENDNOTES

[1] Corresponding author, AFelipe@aya.yale.edu[2] Executive Director,

FAPE; carolp195@gmail.com[3] Hereon, Grade 8 will be referred to as 8 th
grade and Grade 4 as 4 th grade.[4] “Appendix and Summary Statistics and
Standard Errors for Proficiency in Mathematics and Science”, published by
Boston College.[5] www.uis,unesco.org/template/pdf/gea/GED_EN.pdf[6]
In the UNESCO terminology, the pre-school level in the Philippines is
called ISCED 0 or pre-primary; elementary level is ISCED 1 and the high
school level is ISCED 2. In the present text, the authors refer to them as the
pre-school, elementary and high school sub-cycles, respectively.[7] For lack
of space, the test-specific charts are not printed in this report but those
interested may view them at the FAPE Library. FAPE’s address is 7/F
Concorde Condominium Bldg., cor. Legaspi-Benavidez Sts., Salcedo
Village, Makati City; MCC PO Box 2144 Makati City 1229[8] There was
imprecision in estimating the centroid due to lack of data about some
countries.[9] Being administered by the ECLKC (Early Childhood Learning
and Knowledge Center), US Department of Health and Human Services

_________________________

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

ABRAHAM “ABE” I. FELIPE is a social scientist working in the field of

education for the past four decades. He is a retired UP Professor of
Psychology, former President of Fund for Assistance to Private Education
(FAPE), Private Education Retirement Annuity Association (PERAA),
Center for Educational Measurement, Inc. (CEM), and former Deputy
Minister of Education. He has degrees from the UP and Yale.

CAROLINA C. PORIO is Executive Director, Fund for Assistance to

Private Education (FAPE). She oversees the implementation of the multi-
billion Educational Service Contracting (ESC), the Education Voucher
System (EVS) and FAPE’s scholarship programs which have, thus far,
helped more than 4,000 teachers earn their postgraduate degrees and
30,000 more to upgrade their skills.